|
|
Post by The Cat-Tribe on Jun 9, 2014 14:23:47 GMT
As discussed in recent posts by Ranchan and myself (thebatcavern.freeforums.net/post/100478/thread), the word filters have apparently been expanded. "Femin*zi" is now "Amazonian Goddess."
I think it time we re-think and abolish the word filters. We are -- by the nature of TBC itself -- all mature enough to use language responsibility. If one of us slips, others can be counted on to rebuke the error. If the slip is egregious, a word from our Mods should handle it. But preemptive censorship is not needed.
We have had several recent discussions about non-filtered words where posters have had to go to additional trouble to use filtered words (in a responsible, non-derogatory, academic manner) by adding or changing characters. That is just silly to require.
If someone is using a word that is objectionable, let those of us who object challenge them on it and debate its propriety like the adults we are. Censoring such words is both a bit insulting, but, more importantly, stifles discussion about the use of such words that might persuade those who would be filtered that they should not use the term in the first place.
Let's get rid of the filters. At a minimum, let us not expand them and let us not replace words in a clearly biased & contrived manner. |
|
SCIENCE
5000+
Baaaad to the bone!
Heaven is other people.
Posts: 5,744
|
Post by SCIENCE on Jun 9, 2014 16:04:25 GMT
I agree with the Amazonian Goddess above me.
|
|
Ranchan
500+
Sssh...I'm not here.
Posts: 588
|
Post by Ranchan on Jun 9, 2014 17:01:01 GMT
|
|
Дьяково
6250+
Weird, but acceptable
Posts: 6,688 
|
Post by Дьяково on Jun 9, 2014 17:46:59 GMT
I don't really care one way or another, but I agree with TCT that they (probably) aren't really needed here.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Beautiful Darkness on Jun 9, 2014 20:47:25 GMT
I disagree, at least with certain words. I cite the c-word fiasco. |
|
TSM
5000+
Ableist Kinkshamer
Posts: 5,195 
|
Post by TSM on Jun 9, 2014 20:55:28 GMT
I dunno if I'd really call it a fiasco.
Personally I'm okay with slurs and the like being censored. I'm not incredibly happy about it but it's not all that important to me. I don't think we need to censor every possible permutation that could possibly offend someone however, and certainly not with these sorts of terms.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Beautiful Darkness on Jun 9, 2014 20:57:07 GMT
Well it was upsetting, whether you want to call it a fiasco or not.
|
|
SCIENCE
5000+
Baaaad to the bone!
Heaven is other people.
Posts: 5,744
|
Post by SCIENCE on Jun 9, 2014 21:03:47 GMT
Oh right, I have to add something of vital importance here about my usage of slurs:
They're foreign to me. Let me clarify: I don't know the weight behind it from an emotional level. Intellectually, yes, I know using the C-word is wrong. But since I'm not from a culture where the C-word is wrong, it doesn't have the same emotional baggage as it has for other people.
When I am fake mad, I tend to swear in all kinds of different languages (perkele, basz meg, vaffanculo). Yet when I'm actually angry, I can only swear Dutch.
I'll withdraw my support and will abstain in this discussion.
|
|
Ranchan
500+
Sssh...I'm not here.
Posts: 588
|
Post by Ranchan on Jun 9, 2014 21:22:39 GMT
I can see the reason for the other ones that we have here and wouldn't argue for total removal, but this particular one, nope, nuh-uh, nein, no-oh-hoh, not one bit.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Beautiful Darkness on Jun 9, 2014 21:27:53 GMT
I didn't even know there was a word filter for that word. It might be helpful to have a list of filters if we want to weed out only some of them.
|
|
|
|
Post by joseon on Jun 9, 2014 21:51:10 GMT
Oh right, I have to add something of vital importance here about my usage of slurs: They're foreign to me. Let me clarify: I don't know the weight behind it from an emotional level. Intellectually, yes, I know using the C-word is wrong. But since I'm not from a culture where the C-word is wrong, it doesn't have the same emotional baggage as it has for other people. When I am fake mad, I tend to swear in all kinds of different languages (perkele, basz meg, vaffanculo). Yet when I'm actually angry, I can only swear Dutch. I'll withdraw my support and will abstain in this discussion. Yeah. It seems to disproportionately piss off North Americans. North Americans prefer arses, like dumbass and asshole and asshat. |
|
Oviraptor
3000+
I smell like cabbage..
Did someone say space?
Posts: 3,693
|
Post by Oviraptor on Jun 9, 2014 21:56:56 GMT
Oh right, I have to add something of vital importance here about my usage of slurs: They're foreign to me. Let me clarify: I don't know the weight behind it from an emotional level. Intellectually, yes, I know using the C-word is wrong. But since I'm not from a culture where the C-word is wrong, it doesn't have the same emotional baggage as it has for other people. When I am fake mad, I tend to swear in all kinds of different languages (perkele, basz meg, vaffanculo). Yet when I'm actually angry, I can only swear Dutch. I'll withdraw my support and will abstain in this discussion. Yeah. It seems to disproportionately piss off North Americans. North Americans prefer arses, like dumbass and asshole and asshat. Yeah, it always surprised me how incredibly offensive it is across the pond. Here, it's very bad you don't get the same horrified reactions. |
|
|
|
Post by The Beautiful Darkness on Jun 9, 2014 22:02:50 GMT
I will note that I am, in fact, Australian.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Cat-Tribe on Jun 9, 2014 22:05:13 GMT
I disagree, at least with certain words. I cite the c-word fiasco. I understand. One problem we have seen and was present in that "fiasco" is that not everyone is aware that others consider certain terms an offensive slur. And different TBC members find different slurs more offensive than others.
I do not think it will work to have TBC members argue to pick and choose what slurs we want filtered and what slurs we do not. That seems inherently likely to lead to at least as much offense and ruffled feathers as any isolated use of a slur. And what criteria would we use? Do we add up some quanta of offense by the number of members offended and how offended each one is?
I personally do not see a discussion of what is and is not a slur and the reason therefore as fundamentally offensive -- regardless of my offense at a term. I may be disappointed or temporarily disgusted, but I would rather have the opportunity to educate others about why they (IMO) should not use a term than to simply censor the term. I understand why you object to the "fiasco," but I see the honest attempt of a TBC member to ask why he or she should not use a term as exactly how a mature, sensitive, smart individual should handle the matter. Simply filtering a word without explanation or discussion leaves such a member entirely in the dark.
I get that many of us would rather not see certain terms. But each of us have different triggers. Unless we are going to censor all terms that any of us find offensive, then we are going to tilt towards the biases of some either on a majoritarian or arbitrary basis.
If we are going to keep filters at all, I think we have to leave it to the discretion of our Admins. They are as reasonable as any of us. There is little chance that, beyond a few terms, we are going to collectively agree on what terms should and should not be filtered.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Beautiful Darkness on Jun 9, 2014 22:08:07 GMT
I disagree, at least with certain words. I cite the c-word fiasco. I understand. One problem we have seen and was present in that "fiasco" is that not everyone is aware that others consider certain terms an offensive slur. And different TBC members find different slurs more offensive than others.
I do not think it will work to have TBC members argue to pick and choose what slurs we want filtered and what slurs we do not. That seems inherently likely to lead to at least as much offense and ruffled feathers as any isolated use of a slur. And what criteria would we use? Do we add up some quanta of offense by the number of members offended and how offended each one is?
I personally do not see a discussion of what is and is not a slur and the reason therefore as fundamentally offensive -- regardless of my offense at a term. I may be disappointed or temporarily disgusted, but I would rather have the opportunity to educate others about why they (IMO) should not use a term than to simply censor the term. I understand why you object to the "fiasco," but I see the honest attempt of a TBC member to ask why he or she should not use a term as exactly how a mature, sensitive, smart individual should handle the matter. Simply filtering a word without explanation or discussion leaves such a member entirely in the dark.
I get that many of us would rather not see certain terms. But each of us have different triggers. Unless we are going to censor all terms that any of us find offensive, then we are going to tilt towards the biases of some either on a majoritarian or arbitrary basis.
If we are going to keep filters at all, I think we have to leave it to the discretion of our Admins. They are as reasonable as any of us. There is little chance that, beyond a few terms, we are going to collectively agree on what terms should and should not be filtered.
Well in that case, we (including the admins) have already had this discussion with the net result that the filters stay in place.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Beautiful Darkness on Jun 9, 2014 22:10:40 GMT
I will add to that that any filters have by nature been put in place by the admins. So presumably they found some value in doing so, although in some cases it does appear to be comical value.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Cat-Tribe on Jun 9, 2014 22:11:34 GMT
I will note that I am, in fact, Australian. Which merely emphasizes the point that, on an international forum, some parts of the world are going to have different cultural taboos and even within such cultures different individuals are going to have different levels/kinds of reactions to certain terms.
Even if you and I could agree on a list of terms that we do not wish others to use because they are offensive to us, it is unlikely that most (let alone all) of the other members of TBC would agree to the same list. Some would want to add terms and some subtract.
Censorship is, at least to me, not the answer to speech -- even offensive slurs -- with which we disagree. That does not mean deliberately offensive posts should not be addressed by the Admins. It does mean that preemptive censorship should be avoided.
|
|
|
|
Post by joseon on Jun 9, 2014 22:13:55 GMT
I will note that I am, in fact, Australian. Sure. That was just a broad-strokes observation. But I do think that there are some cultural differences coming into play. |
|
|
|
Post by The Beautiful Darkness on Jun 9, 2014 22:14:27 GMT
I will note that I am, in fact, Australian. Which merely emphasizes the point that, on an international forum, some parts of the world are going to have different cultural taboos and even within such cultures different individuals are going to have different levels/kinds of reactions to certain terms.
Even if you and I could agree on a list of terms that we do not wish others to use because they are offensive to us, it is unlikely that most (let alone all) of the other members of TBC would agree to the same list. Some would want to add terms and some subtract.
Censorship is, at least to me, not the answer to speech -- even offensive slurs -- with which we disagree. That does not mean deliberately offensive posts should not be addressed by the Admins. It does mean that preemptive censorship should be avoided.
Why? Why would you possibly need to use the c-word? I don't mind if you refer to it, e.g. "This stupid misogynist called me the nasty word for vagina.", but I see exactly zero reason for why you literally need to use that particular word. |
|
|
|
Post by The Cat-Tribe on Jun 9, 2014 22:15:29 GMT
I understand. One problem we have seen and was present in that "fiasco" is that not everyone is aware that others consider certain terms an offensive slur. And different TBC members find different slurs more offensive than others.
I do not think it will work to have TBC members argue to pick and choose what slurs we want filtered and what slurs we do not. That seems inherently likely to lead to at least as much offense and ruffled feathers as any isolated use of a slur. And what criteria would we use? Do we add up some quanta of offense by the number of members offended and how offended each one is?
I personally do not see a discussion of what is and is not a slur and the reason therefore as fundamentally offensive -- regardless of my offense at a term. I may be disappointed or temporarily disgusted, but I would rather have the opportunity to educate others about why they (IMO) should not use a term than to simply censor the term. I understand why you object to the "fiasco," but I see the honest attempt of a TBC member to ask why he or she should not use a term as exactly how a mature, sensitive, smart individual should handle the matter. Simply filtering a word without explanation or discussion leaves such a member entirely in the dark.
I get that many of us would rather not see certain terms. But each of us have different triggers. Unless we are going to censor all terms that any of us find offensive, then we are going to tilt towards the biases of some either on a majoritarian or arbitrary basis.
If we are going to keep filters at all, I think we have to leave it to the discretion of our Admins. They are as reasonable as any of us. There is little chance that, beyond a few terms, we are going to collectively agree on what terms should and should not be filtered.
Well in that case, we (including the admins) have already had this discussion with the net result that the filters stay in place.
So that means we cannot ever revisit the subject?
One point I mean to add. I understand and agree that, for example, the c-word is a slur that causes offense and should not be used. But I am not convinced that "c-word" or "c*nt" are substantively different. As the filters can be avoided with all of us still knowing what offensive slur was used, the filters seem rather juvenile.
I thought they were amusing originally. They have grown tiresome and I do not see the purpose among mature TBC members.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Cat-Tribe on Jun 9, 2014 22:19:52 GMT
Which merely emphasizes the point that, on an international forum, some parts of the world are going to have different cultural taboos and even within such cultures different individuals are going to have different levels/kinds of reactions to certain terms.
Even if you and I could agree on a list of terms that we do not wish others to use because they are offensive to us, it is unlikely that most (let alone all) of the other members of TBC would agree to the same list. Some would want to add terms and some subtract.
Censorship is, at least to me, not the answer to speech -- even offensive slurs -- with which we disagree. That does not mean deliberately offensive posts should not be addressed by the Admins. It does mean that preemptive censorship should be avoided.
Why? Why would you possibly need to use the c-word? I don't mind if you refer to it, e.g. "This stupid misogynist called me the nasty word for vagina.", but I see exactly zero reason for why you literally need to use that particular word. I don't see any "need" for me or anyone else to use that word. That is partially the point. I would think few here would feel such "need." If they do, they can avoid the filter with a simple asterisk. And those of us who object to such language can then confront the word and articulate why it should not be used.
I can see (almost) zero reason why we need to pretend someone did not use a particular word merely because it wears a flimsy veil.
|
|
TSM
5000+
Ableist Kinkshamer
Posts: 5,195
|
Post by TSM on Jun 9, 2014 22:20:37 GMT
I understand. One problem we have seen and was present in that "fiasco" is that not everyone is aware that others consider certain terms an offensive slur. And different TBC members find different slurs more offensive than others.
I do not think it will work to have TBC members argue to pick and choose what slurs we want filtered and what slurs we do not. That seems inherently likely to lead to at least as much offense and ruffled feathers as any isolated use of a slur. And what criteria would we use? Do we add up some quanta of offense by the number of members offended and how offended each one is?
I personally do not see a discussion of what is and is not a slur and the reason therefore as fundamentally offensive -- regardless of my offense at a term. I may be disappointed or temporarily disgusted, but I would rather have the opportunity to educate others about why they (IMO) should not use a term than to simply censor the term. I understand why you object to the "fiasco," but I see the honest attempt of a TBC member to ask why he or she should not use a term as exactly how a mature, sensitive, smart individual should handle the matter. Simply filtering a word without explanation or discussion leaves such a member entirely in the dark.
I get that many of us would rather not see certain terms. But each of us have different triggers. Unless we are going to censor all terms that any of us find offensive, then we are going to tilt towards the biases of some either on a majoritarian or arbitrary basis.
If we are going to keep filters at all, I think we have to leave it to the discretion of our Admins. They are as reasonable as any of us. There is little chance that, beyond a few terms, we are going to collectively agree on what terms should and should not be filtered.
Well in that case, we (including the admins) have already had this discussion with the net result that the filters stay in place.
Sure, for some words in question. But more have been added since that discussion and I don't really see a problem in revisiting the issue. I know I use the 'c-word' myself, but I'm not opposed to keeping it censored. nor am I opposed to keeping censored words that will actively hurt people on TBC when they're used. I do think that there's a time and place to revisit the issue, especially as new words are added and/or removed. People's opinions and views change. |
|
|
|
Post by The Beautiful Darkness on Jun 9, 2014 22:20:43 GMT
Well in that case, we (including the admins) have already had this discussion with the net result that the filters stay in place.
So that means we cannot ever revisit the subject?
One point I mean to add. I understand and agree that, for example, the c-word is a slur that causes offense and should not be used. But I am not convinced that "c-word" or "c*nt" are substantively different. As the filters can be avoided with all of us still knowing what offensive slur was used, the filters seem rather juvenile.
I thought they were amusing originally. They have grown tiresome and I do not see the purpose among mature TBC members.
Oh ok, you have convinced me of your maturity by implying that I am juvenile.
You can discuss it all you like, that is exactly what we are doing now. I just don't see why the decision would be overturned at this juncture more than at any other.
|
|
Дьяково
6250+
Weird, but acceptable
Posts: 6,688
|
Post by Дьяково on Jun 9, 2014 22:21:24 GMT
Why? Why would you possibly need to use the c-word? I don't mind if you refer to it, e.g. "This stupid misogynist called me the nasty word for vagina.", but I see exactly zero reason for why you literally need to use that particular word. I don't see any "need" for me or anyone else to use that word. That is partially the point. I would think few here would feel such "need." If they do, they can avoid the filter with a simple asterisk. And those of us who object to such language can then confront the word and articulate why it should not be used.
I can see (almost) zero reason why we need to pretend someone did not use a particular word merely because it wears a flimsy veil.
Flimsy veils are quite nice in the right situation...  |
|
|
|
Post by The Beautiful Darkness on Jun 9, 2014 22:24:28 GMT
Why? Why would you possibly need to use the c-word? I don't mind if you refer to it, e.g. "This stupid misogynist called me the nasty word for vagina.", but I see exactly zero reason for why you literally need to use that particular word. I don't see any "need" for me or anyone else to use that word. That is partially the point. I would think few here would feel such "need." If they do, they can avoid the filter with a simple asterisk. And those of us who object to such language can then confront the word and articulate why it should not be used.
I can see (almost) zero reason why we need to pretend someone did not use a particular word merely because it wears a flimsy veil.
So... if you don't need to use that word, then why do you object to the filter? It should be irrelevant to you.
Well in that case, we (including the admins) have already had this discussion with the net result that the filters stay in place.
Sure, for some words in question. But more have been added since that discussion and I don't really see a problem in revisiting the issue. I know I use the 'c-word' myself, but I'm not opposed to keeping it censored. nor am I opposed to keeping censored words that will actively hurt people on TBC when they're used. I do think that there's a time and place to revisit the issue, especially as new words are added and/or removed. People's opinions and views change. I don't know that more have been added or if they were not noticed before because no one tried to use them. Again though, I'm not objecting to discussion. I am here, talking about it.  |
|
|
|
Post by The Beautiful Darkness on Jun 9, 2014 22:25:50 GMT
I don't see any "need" for me or anyone else to use that word. That is partially the point. I would think few here would feel such "need." If they do, they can avoid the filter with a simple asterisk. And those of us who object to such language can then confront the word and articulate why it should not be used.
I can see (almost) zero reason why we need to pretend someone did not use a particular word merely because it wears a flimsy veil.
Flimsy veils are quite nice in the right situation... Oh yes, I can imagine such a situation  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2014 22:27:54 GMT
I'm still pretty much a newbie to the forums, seeing as how I'm only a few months in, and I was never around for whatever fiascos may or may not have happened over the usage of certain terms, but all I can really say is this:
We're all (mostly) adults here, or at least, we can act like ones, right? Surely we won't stoop to the level of adolescents and will be able to use some words appropriately without filters, right?
But then again, I wasn't part of such a fiasco. So do what you must, I suppose.
|
|
TSM
5000+
Ableist Kinkshamer
Posts: 5,195
|
Post by TSM on Jun 9, 2014 22:29:59 GMT
I don't know that more have been added or if they were not noticed before because no one tried to use them. Again though, I'm not objecting to discussion. I am here, talking about it. Which is fine! And I didn't mean to imply that you were, my apologies for doing so. On the subject at hand though, I don't think we should filter words like faminazi. It's unnecessary. I also tentatively support eliminating, or at least cutting down on our filters, but I think we'd need the full list to see. Is that something that's easily accessible Poli Dipshit ? |
|
|
|
Post by The Beautiful Darkness on Jun 9, 2014 22:31:37 GMT
I'm still pretty much a newbie to the forums, seeing as how I'm only a few months in, and I was never around for whatever fiascos may or may not have happened over the usage of certain terms, but all I can really say is this: We're all (mostly) adults here, or at least, we can act like ones, right? Surely we won't stoop to the level of adolescents and will be able to use some words appropriately without filters, right? But then again, I wasn't part of such a fiasco. So do what you must, I suppose. And in what context might it be 'appropriate' to verbatim use a highly offensive slur? I honestly can't think of any situation where it is needful. |
|
|
|
Post by The Beautiful Darkness on Jun 9, 2014 22:33:56 GMT
I don't know that more have been added or if they were not noticed before because no one tried to use them. Again though, I'm not objecting to discussion. I am here, talking about it. Which is fine! And I didn't mean to imply that you were, my apologies for doing so. On the subject at hand though, I don't think we should filter words like faminazi. It's unnecessary. I also tentatively support eliminating, or at least cutting down on our filters, but I think we'd need the full list to see. Is that something that's easily accessible Poli Dipshit ? I agree that particular slur is less offensive than certain others which I know are filtered.
EDIT: Having said that, I would be curious to know in what context people would consider it imperative to discussion.
|
|
